The 46,000,000 Minority

Sounds so nice you posted twice, Froggity?How many doctors have been killed or harmed by you fundies? How many books censored? The only reason you lot aren't strapping explosives onto your teenage daughters is...wait for it...

YOU ALREADY CONTROL FUCKING EVERYTHING.

The dialog in the popular media is based on the premise that the bible is the ultimate life manual. The cultural attitudes that allow us to even consider letting pharmacists refuse prescriptions, or ratting out abused pregnant girls to their parents, well we can thank you holy folk for that too. And don't get me started on the mistrust of science and acceptance of superstition that permeates our culture. WTF is the media doing reporting on that poor schmuck who got shot in his church? "The Whole-ee Bah-Bull done stopped that thar bullet!" Actually, three other bullets hit him. Therefore, the bible was wholly ineffective at stopping bullets.

And you call ME bigoted because I refuse to kowtow to your god? Because I stand up for the rights of those who choose no religion? Liar, Pharisee, hypocrite!

And BTW, Carrot Top is a False Prophet. Yea, there is but one Messiah, verily the Holy Prophet GALLAGHER. He shall smite his foes with the Sledge-o-Matic of the LORD and the streets shall flow red with watermelon juice, forever AMEN.

You don't have to burn books to destroy a culture. Just get people to stop reading them.
---Ray Bradbury

By twilight druid March 16, 2009 - 1:52am It's true, what you say. It seems Frogglodytes grasp of economics is as poor as his grasp of history!
When Bush took office, there was a budget surplus, there was also a debate about what to do with it. Republicans wanted it to finance tax cuts, Clinton and the Democrats wanted to start "buying back" the debt and repay social security. It's laughable how the republicans wanted to 'privatize' social security, claiming it would be insolvent by 2041, while they were pillaging the fund the whole time. It's fair to say that Bush wasn't the only one who raided social security to finance budget shortfalls, but when Froggfeces babbles about "mathematical tricks" and "smoke and mirrors", he neglects to report that BushCo never reported the war expenditures and money pillaged from social security in the budget!

Polly...... it does seem that the problems are behind us now.

OthelloOnly our AAR CS techie knows for sure...

(I'm just hoping the worst is behind us)

By othelloMarch 16, 2009 - 12:36amYou know the sad part is that to most Americans, the household budget is equal to the household salary. This is why it isn't surprising that many Americans are probably as confused as frogg troll here. The idea of setting a budget less than the annual salary in order to save money is just not heard of. Instead the budget is actually set above the annual salary. The extra money comes from credit cards.

And of course the right wingers take this a step further with government. They do not believe in fiscal responsibility in Washington at all. Look what happened under Bush and the republican congress! They never included the war costs in the budget. So the government always went over budget and since the budget was set to leave no extra from the taxes, of course the debt grew.

Aww, Poor Froggfeces, No Sense Of Humor!Sorry you got all butt hurt, but I find it amusing that you made my point for me in your last paragraph!
My god, you STILL don't get it! When you have a budget surplus, you can start paying down the debt. See, maybe I will have to import this to four or five threads before you understand that the budget and the debt are independent of one another. Are you really this stupid?

As far as adjusting claims, you continued to insist that the budget and debt were the same thing, you even went so far as to give me a link to Clinton's debt numbers, telling me to look at the deficit numbers! Now you are "Huffitizing", as you put it, that claim! Yeah, right! I caught it a 'minute' sooner than you did, but you kept insisting for days that it was so! HA! Another point for me, Froggfeces!

I'm signing off, so you can twist spin and lie to yourself.

Bye, Dummy!

global warming has statistics and dataso you can prove it. creation and intelligent design are fairy tales without data, facts, stats, or logic - you either accept it or you don't - you can't debate an article of faith. you can debate what is science and what is not science and intelligent design is not science.

national debt has togo down in order to claim a budget surplus? if you have more revenue than expenses (including debt service) you have a surplus.

politicians are hypocrites and liars."power walks on crooked legs" so even an atheist would assume a religious stance unless an irreligious stance would serve them better.

Bush's budget was as fake as his reasons for going into Iraq. For one, he never included the cost of the Iraq debacle or the Afghanistan fiasco.

Aww, I'm sorry, I assumedAww, I'm sorry, I assumed that because you could dish it out that you could also take it. My bad.

And me leave you alone on it!! Are you serious? That's laughable, you are the one that has imported this shit to 3 different threads.

I will admit that I did make a mistake on that post though, I didn't mean to say that Obama doubled the entire national debt, (not for the lack of trying though) I meant to say that he doubled Bush's deficit. I was going to correct it as soon as I caught it, but you caught it a minute quicker. I'm willing to give you the point on that one.
I am sticking by my original claim that there was no REAL budget surplus though, I'm not gonna go all Huffy and try to adjust my claim after the fact. As far as I'm concerned, without the national debt going down it is simply retarded to try to claim a surplus, it's mathematical smoke and mirrors.

Wow, Then Whoever Is Running The Boards Would Be Smarter ... ... than you, Froggfeces. You don't even know the difference between the two;

"Besides, there is no way to deny that BushAdmin doubled the debt in eight short years. It amazes me that the right wingers think they can just ignore that fact".
By othello March 12, 2009 - 12:07am

To which you stupidly answered;

"Yeah, and Obama doubled that in 2 months. Bush never reached a trillion dollar budget deficit, not even close, Obama will accomplish that feat with his first budget".
By obamatrauma March 12, 2009 - 1:55am

You don't know the difference between the budget and the debt! It's right here in print!

I can see you are not going to leave me alone about this, are you, stalker?

Bye, Dummy!

You don't know what I think.

But since you "think" you do, I can tell you this for sure:

I don't care who you marry. I would never presume to tell you who you can fall in love with.

I don't care what you believe in. Just don't push it like drugs and attempt to infect my kids or me.

I DO care about those being maligned for simply being born different.

If I have described the Religious right leaders in this country as anti science and promoting discrimination and hate, it's because they do. Duh!

Perhaps you could take your head out of your butt. Not only will you be able to breath much better, but you will also be able to see much better. Perhaps is just has to be damp where you come from?

It's cute how you think youIt's cute how you think you know me! I'm not a religious person at all.

But, just because I'm not religious doesn't mean I feel the need to ridicule and attack those that are with hate filled stereotypes and vicious accusations. I simply do not care what my neighbors chose to believe or not believe in because it doesn't affect me either way. But I know who does care!

You remind me a lot of those assholes that hold up the "God hates fags" signs at people's funerals, you both spread your "message" with hatred. You both feel so strongly that you are right that you don't think it matters how you get the word out. You both feel that no blow is too low, as long as it is directed at the "enemy".

Jefferson wasn't an atheist,Jefferson wasn't an atheist, and just because his belief system couldn't be labeled as 100% identical to any specific church doesn't mean he was "non-religious". Sure, there may be lots of Jefferson quotes questioning the existence of God, but there aren't any saying that there is no God. You've been given some bad information.

Those that are into "mysticism" and the "occult" feel "belittled" every time someone says, "Show me proof". Of course, there isn't any. That's why it's called "faith".

Now, perhaps you could answer me. Why is it that people will spend thousands of dollars giving to "centers of supernatural" hoping they will go to an invisible "heaven" that know one has ever seen and "lived to tell about it", yet would never pay money for a car they haven't "checked out" first?

Every time I hear Bible fables with Noah's Ark and burning bushes and "ascending to Heaven", I blanch and shrug and say to myself, "Who could possibly be so credulous that they believe this crap"? And then I say, "Oh, I know".

Here's an amusing question,Here's an amusing question, why is it that an 85% "consensus" is all the "proof" that is needed to have the right to ridicule and belittle "non-believers" of man made global warming, but in the case of the religious vs. the non-religious it seems to be the other way around? I don't expect any serious answers (especially from a certain individual whose opinion is so centered in hate that he couldn't possibly see the humor in it), I just thought it was fairly amusing.

Wow, what's with theWow, what's with the no-posts and double-posts??? Probably someone stupid enough to think that budget deficits don't cause growth of the national debt is running the boards!

Thanks, Polly...... it seems to have improved, I have yet to have a post disappear today.
I was thinking the problems originated more from a troll attack than moderator software trouble, though :~)

othello, Yes, it's REALLY frustrating and we are all going through the same thing, so perhaps that can be some sort of comfort to us all, but it appears AAR is having major trauma with their server, so their moderating software seems to be a bit OFF. Gradually the posts are appearing once again, errr at least the posts that aren't offensive as I'm sure there is still some sort of moderation in place.

Someone should start a movement and name itafter Thomas Jefferson. This way it would have the legitimacy and gravitas of a founding father, and it would also serve to remind the body politic that at its inception, this country had atheists and non-religious persons serving within the government, one of which was a president.

This movement would serve to focus the non-religious as a voting block and also serve as a way to raise funds. Without funds, you can't fight the religious nut cases. Just watch the amount of money the religious fundies pull in. How can you compete in the arena of ideas if you don't have the money to get your ideas out there?

The reason Fundagelicals don't see their actions as "hate" is because they have the belief that they are doing God's work.

Ask a Fundy how many gays they know and most will tell you, "I don't want to know any". And yet, they feel perfectly comfortable accusing people they don't know or even want to know of messing with animals, being dangerous to children, spreading disease (even though the vast majority of AIDS carriers are hetero). They go on about having "morals" and the only ones they show are ones normal people would be embarrassed to admit to.

When you point out that Conservative Christian colleges are the lowest rated in the nation, they feel they are being "attacked". But they ARE the lowest rated in the nation.

When you point out the very few scientists who represent the Fundys, they feel they are being attacked. But there are very few. I don't know what to say, there just are.

When they say, "teach the controversy", and you say, "There is NO controversy", they accuse you of having a closed mind. Out of all the tens of thousands of scientific papers submitted every year for "peer" review, NOT A SINGLE ONE comes form Fundys. NOT ONE. So where is this magical "controversy"? No where. Because it's "magical". It's "occult". It's "supernatural". That means it's not science.

They will say "peer" review is "close minded" because they don't know what "peer" review means. They also confuse "theory" with "Scientific Theory". It's like confusing "red" with "read" or "meet" with "meat". Sounds the same, even looks the same, must BE the same. But it's NOT the same.

By pipefittergal March 15, 2009 - 10:17am Yes, I did that, but I didn't find a trojan, my posts started going up temporarily, but I do a virus sweep every day.... so, let's hope it's just temporary. I tried editing a couple of posts that went through, but then the edited version disappeared! Frustrating!

Let's See...... someone with a screen name like ObamaTrauma lecturing someone else about hate speech???!!!??? What is wrong with this picture?

Easy to list achievements by Fundagelicals? Ha! Good one. They stopped Prop 8. If you could call that an "achievement". They have the highest teen pregnancy rate in the "industrialized" nations. So they "breed". What an "achievement". There, I listed both of them.

Everywhere I see the Right wing conservative "Fundys", I see lawsuits and threats and anti this and anti that. Look at all the problems within the Military with the far right attempting to force their supernatural beliefs on soldiers.

-------Would you want to discuss gay achievements with someone that said the only gay achievement was AIDS?

Sure, I'm talking to you.

When you start talking gay achievements, there are so many, who knows where to begin. Fundigelicals want to believe the gays are just "singers" and "actors", but as soon as you start listing their incredible accomplishments in science and architecture, literature and even computers and so many other fields. You could list gay achievements in books, you could list fundy achievieents on one hand. I already listed two.

The truly ironic thing is that most of the gays in this country come from those that declare themselves "Christian". They throw out their best and brightest based on occult messages.

I don't sling mud. I don't need to. I just point out the "facts".

I'm not "seeing it". I'm not "feeling it" when it comes to the fundagelicals.

Anyone know the name of Sarah Palin's "witchdoctor"? I think OT could use his "services".

By othello March 14, 2009 - 7:54pm Have you done a virus sweep lately? I just did one, and found a trojan (eewe!) in my system. I've been having trouble on this site, too.

EDIT: It appears that dealing with that did the trick. My two posts have showed up like normal.

RE: obamatraumaDear OT:
I don't want to get into a slinging contest and don't usually get into these kind of discussions...but
You asked about "evangelic suicide bombers last year" (paraphrasing here).
Well it wasn't last year and I don't know the details of his particular religious affliction but I understand Tim McVeagh (unsure of spelling) who killed some hundreds of people in Kansas City was a fundamentalist christian.
Just because a self proclaimed fundamentalist christian did something horendous because he was delusional doesn't comdemn all people who share that faith as being loonatic. Niether are all muslums supporters of terrorism just because a bunch of deluded guys who were muslum did something equally horrid.
The world is full of nut jobs. The thorns grow up with the wheat. If we try to to destroy the thorns we destroy the whole crop. Jesus advised to let them grow and they would be seperated at the harvest. That is frustrating but I certainly can't top Jesus for wisdom. Take a deep breath and consider the lillies.
Now about that trauma you are suffering from: Render unto Caessar that which is Caesar's... and take a deep breath...

Wow, it is impossible toWow, it is impossible to have an honest debate with someone whose belief system's foundation is so deeply rooted in hatred. Would you want to debate gay issues with someone that belittled and mocked saying gayness must be fought out of existence and constantly used hate filled stereotypes and referred to gays as "faggots" that would spread gayness all across the country and form a gay taliban if only given the opportunity? Would you want to discuss gay achievements with someone that said the only gay achievement was AIDS?

It would be kinda hard to have an honest discussion with someone like that for you wouldn't it?

Well, that's exactly how you are being towards religious people dean, maybe that's why nobody from your enemy's side will have an honest debate with you. The kind of debate that you pretend you want, but you don't really want that debate at all, do you? You just want to spew venom at people you despise.

Oh, and I've told you before, it would be easy to list off a bunch of achievements made by the so-called "fundies", but this isn't a fucking football game where score is kept. Your having more spare time to make up a longer list of gay achievements than anyone else cares to spend constructing their own list of "fundy" achievements doesn't make gays a higher quality people.

It just means that you have more spare time for meaningless list making than everyone else deano.

Wow, it is impossible toWow, it is impossible to have an honest debate with someone whose belief system's foundation is so rooted in hatred. Would you want to debate gay issues with someone that belittled and mocked saying gayness must be fought out of existence and constantly used hate filled stereotypes and referred to gays as "faggots" that would spread gayness all across the country and form a gay taliban if only given the opportunity? Would you want to discuss gay achievements with someone that said the only gay achievement was AIDS? It would be kinda hard to have an honest discussion with someone like that for you wouldn't it?

Well, that's exactly how you are being towards religious people, maybe that's why nobody will have an honest debate with you. The kind of debate that you pretend you want, but you don't really want that debate do you? You just want to spew venom at people you despise.

Oh, and I've told you before, it would be easy to list off a bunch of achievements made by the so-called "fundies", but this isn't a fucking football game where score is kept. Your having more spare time to make up a longer list of gay achievements than anyone else cares to spend constructing their own list of "fundy" achievements doesn't make gays a higher quality people.

It just means that you have more spare time than everyone else deano.

Honest debate? "If a church goer wants to believe that God forced Al Qaeda to crash planes into buildings because a kid on the 75 floor was masturbating, what harm does that do to you personally? How is that attacking your belief structure in any way?"

Sorry, you are NOT a "master debater".

Funny how many "Fundys" say, "Well at least we are not al Qaeda" like that should make us feel better. Believe me, if they could get the chance, they would be. Evangelical Christians and right wing Muslim extremists share many of the same beliefs. It's all about opportunity. People with do anything, anything at all if they think God is on their side.

Uh, HELLO, it's the evangelicals and those of that ilk that gave us George Bush. Bush has affected not only everyone in the US, but everyone in the world, and not in a good way.

The damage to "scientific education" in this country can be laid at the feet of the Christian Right.

Over the years, Christian leaders have talked about "rounding up the gays" and making being gay a crime. I don't hear much condemnation of Fred Phelps coming from the right or those right-wing leaders that compare gays to murder, bestiality and other odious activities, so just put your pathetic "outrage" away.

I'm still waiting for all the many right wing "achievements" and "contributions" to society. I know they aren't in the fields of science, or art, or literature, or music, or engineering, or medicine.

In fact, many consider the Chrystal Cathedral to be one of the greatest Cathedrals in North America. Gee, I wonder who designed that? Huh? If right wing-nuts could have, the would have. But they didn't.

It's the right wing Christians that try to force the occult into our public schools 'wad.

It's the right wing Christian leaders that attempt to blame 9/11 and Katrina and other natural disasters on good, patriotic Americans so don't preach to me. If they could get away with it, right wingers would have turned this country into a Christian Taliban years ago. I know it and you know it.

Amazing, you are moreAmazing, you are more concerned about evangelicals than you are about Muslim extremists.

How many people were killed by evangelical suicide bombers last year deano?

It's worrisome that you spend so much of your time worried about the belief structure of other people. If I believed that cigarettes were good for you, that God was a tree in my back yard, that oil was angel shit, and that Carrot Top was the messiah, what harm would that do to you personally? Why do you care so much about the belief structure of others? I could see being so obsessed with them if there were mass killings by evangelical terrorists, but there isn't.

If evangelicals were so fucking evil, they would be hounding you right here, mocking your beliefs, but they aren't, are they dean? You have invented a supposed hatred of gays in order to excuse your own hatred of the religious, you're opinions of these people are bigoted are fueled by hatred, and that is just sad.

Amazing, you are moreAmazing, you are more concerned about evangelicals than you are about Muslim extremists.

How many people were killed by evangelical suicide bombers last year deano?

It's worrisome that you spend so much of your time worried about the belief structure of other people. If I believed that cigarettes were good for you, that God was a tree in my back yard, that oil was angel shit, and that Carrot Top was the messiah, what harm would that do to you personally? Why do you care so much about the belief structure of others? I could see being so obsessed with them if there were mass killings by evangelical terrorists, but there isn't.

If evangelicals were so fucking evil, they would be hounding you right here, mocking your beliefs, but they aren't, are they dean? You're opinions of these people are bigoted are fueled by hatred, and that is just sad.

I'm damn near positive thatI'm damn near positive that you are not capable of having an honest debate. You repeat these bigoted stereotypes to yourself enough to believe them, then you try to spread them around on here. Bravo.

Why do you care what is preached in a church if you aren't in that church anyway? If a church goer wants to believe that the planet is only 50 years old, what harm does that do to you personally? If a church goer wants to believe that God forced Al Qaeda to crash planes into buildings because a kid on the 75 floor was masturbating, what harm does that do to you personally? How is that attacking your belief structure in any way? There is a difference between believing differently than someone else and attacking another's beliefs.

I would agree with you if there were tons of churches out there that put up a bunch of billboards showing monkeys flinging shit at each other with a caption that said that all atheists believe that these are our cousins or that atheists aren't capable of having any form of morality, but the problem with your argument is that they don't. Generally speaking, they preach to those that choose to attend their churches, sure there are some pushy people out there that feel the need to force their belief structure onto others, but as with atheists doing the same, it is the vast minority.

No one complainsabout the "religious" attacking the beliefs of non-religious.

It's like this:

Religious - God "shimmered" people into being a few thousand years ago with speech already in place.

Non-Religious - All the evidence says otherwise.

Religious - Why are you attacking my beliefs? How dare you. Don't you know 9/11 happened because God lifted his "veil of protection" because we allow women to have rights? Don't you know that Katrina happened because we allow "gays" to exist in this Christian nation?

Non-Religious - That sounds like crap.

Religious - There you go mocking me. Well, you will burn in hell while I will go to heaven and play tunes on harps and live in magical happiness forever.

Non-Religious - do you have proof of any of that.

Religious - Stop it, just stop attacking my religion.

No one complains about the "religious" attacking the beliefs of non-religious.

It's like this:

Religious - God "shimmered" people into being a few thousand years ago with speech already in place.

Non-Religious - All the evidence says otherwise.

Religious - Why are you attacking my beliefs? How dare you. Don't you know 9/11 happened because God lifted his "veil of protection" because we allow women to have rights? Don't you know that Katrina happened because we allow "gays" to exist in this Christian nation?

Non-Religious - That sounds like crap.

Religious - There you go mocking me. Well, you will burn in hell while I will go to heaven and play tunes on harps and live in magical happiness forever.

Non-Religious - do you have proof of any of that.

Religious - Stop it, just stop attacking my religion.

By odummyrummy March 14, 2009 - 7:37pm "What's up with this site lately? Is it only messing with my posts"?
By obama trauma March 14, 2009 - 7:37pm

The site is only messing with the posts of those too stupid to understand the difference between a budget and the national debt, so yes, it's only messing with your posts.

Just playin', Froggfeces.... it's messing with every one's posts.

Do non-religious people runDo non-religious people run for political office as often as religious people do? The study failed to mention for some reason.
You can't blame the religious people for non-religious people's lack of representation if they don't seek political offices proportionately. Just because they hypothetically make up 15% of population doesn't mean that they should just be handed 15% of all political offices.

And as far as those billboards are concerned, perhaps if they would have just promoted their own belief structure instead of attacking the beliefs of religious people, there would have been no backlash.

What's up with this siteWhat's up with this site lately? Is it only messing with my posts?

Do non-religious people runDo non-religious people run for political office as often as religious people do? The study failed to mention for some reason.
You can't blame the religious people for non-religious people's lack of representation if they don't seek political offices proportionately. Just because they hypothetically make up 15% of population doesn't mean that they should just be handed 15% of all political offices.

And as far as those billboards are concerned, perhaps if they would have just promoted their own belief structure instead of attacking the beliefs of religious people, there would have been no backlash.

So let me get this straight, Officer BillYou believe that the physical one-third of a magical being from heaven, made the entire universe out of nothing, six thousand years ago, in six literal, twenty-four hour days. Furthermore, all life forms were created just as they are today. The fossil record simply reflects those species that were too large, too sinful or too just-plain-stoopid to make it to Noah's Ark prior to the total destruction by flood of the entire planet by the cosmic one-third of this same vengeful being.

Then too, you believe that the earth was created prior to the sun and other stars. According to your version of a "scientific document," the moon must shine with its own light rather than reflecting sunlight as has been proven. And since Joshua "stopped the sunn in the sky," you also believe that the entire universe revolves around its center...the earth.

Furthermore, for those of you who have been "born again," the ethereal one-third of this same being causes you to raise the dead, speak in strange languages, and call prosperity to yourselves. And soon, you good holy folk will be rewarded for your hate, racism and cruelty by being raptured from the earth to become mindless automatons serving all three thirds of your beloved being. The rest of us, will be shown His great love by being sent to burn forever in hell.

And you say liberals are mentally ill. Jesus H. Christ. You need to seriously get on some medication. Darwin had it right. Please select yourself out of the gene pool. Cut your c0ck off before it's too late.

You don't have to burn books to destroy a culture. Just get people to stop reading them.
---Ray Bradbury

Extremely well put"they feel persecuted because they don't have the authority to force us to faith and burn us at the stake. "

This is probably the most concise explanation of modern Christo-fascist thinking I have ever seen. Bravo.

Also, is it necessary to get on the bread line early in order to get some commiecakes?

By commiecakesMarch 14, 2009 - 12:24pm First off, the main reason liberals believe in evolution is that they think it disproves God. Your creation myth is Darwin's theory of evolution, which is about one step above Scientology in scientific rigor. It's a make-believe story based on a theory that is a tautology, with no proof in a scientific laboratory or the fossil record (even after 150 years of determined looking).

How's that for starters?

evolutionor darwin is something i can accept much more easily than magical creation. it's incredulous that you find that difficult to understand. i think all you people with all your faith in magic should be satisfied that the law doesn't declare you insane and have you all committed. you all should be very satisfied, because this faith easily fits into the legal definition of insanity.

they are offended enough that they don't completely own and control every soul. even with all their power they feel marginalized because there are unfaithful among them which leaves america ripe for pillars of salt and so forth. they feel persecuted because they don't have the authority to force us to faith and burn us at the stake.

i feel science and logic has come to the point of being undeniable, yet they still deny. i think the political arm of this "secularism" should reconcile with religion. there is an acceptable meeting point between science and religion.

the soul is a part of the body. the soul is the purpose of our evolution. and the future evolution of our soul into a higher manifestation is the purpose of the universe. the evolution of faith has led us to their monotheism, then to atheism, and then full circle back to the garden of eden. there is a higher purpose to their religion, but they must realize that their religion is nothing more than a phase in human evolution.

double post.

double post.

Who knows? Who cares?

The messiah of the pseudo scientific right was asked at the Dover trial if, using the same criteria that categorizes ID as a "science", would alchemy and astrology also be considered "science"? Remember, Behe was under oath. His answer was "yes". That means that "alchemy", "astrology" and, "ID" are on a "level playing field".

This isn't 1882. Notice how the ignorant right still keeps referring to Darwin? Since 2000, we have learned way more than double what we knew up to 2000.

And ALL the sciences corroborate each other. Whether it's genetics or geology, paleontology or even the study of continental drift. It's all interconnected.

We have transitional forms. We know how the flagellum "evolved".

Take a look at ignorant religious right leaders who believe the Bible is literal and listen to what they are saying. Some even say the study of science causes "mental illness".

And these same people are insulted when you laugh at their ignorance. Well, I feel insulted that that with not a single trace of any kind of "evidence" they loudly announce that there is some kind of "controversy". Well there isn't. It's a bunch of ignorant fools who believe in a primitive Middle Eastern religion that is less creative than "Marvel Comics". It is sickening.

And, what's worse, they use that primitive religion for all types of evil purposes including discrimination, hate, ignorance and war.

clarify.specifically, what do you mean by "you can't believe darwin either"? and "so what to do"?

By deanrddMarch 14, 2009 - 10:48am Problem is; you can't believe Darwin either.

So what to do...?

I believe that there must be a backlash because of what the religious right has been doing to this country for the last 40 years and the terrible damage they have caused.

Fundagelical churches have swelled in membership by 8 million in the last few years. True, the majority are uneducated credulous, but with that many people comes funds.

They have sucked money away from institutions of higher learning to create tier four Christian Colleges; the lowest rated in the US. Places where you can get degrees in "Bible memorization" and learn non-critical thought and "how to follow" with a minor in "do not question".

Some think that when it comes to "science" they are only against the foundation science for biology, botany and physiology, which is evolution. How bad is that?

The truth is they are against every science that discredits "magical creation". That means every science.

They want alternates taught to Astronomy, Paleontology, and Geology to name a few because these sciences directly refute Bible fables such as Noah's Ark and the Garden of Eden.

They have even created an animatronics’ museum where dinosaurs wear "saddles" and I suspect some want the Flintstones taught as a "documentary".

They haven’t given up on teaching the “occult” in public schools because they can still “save” the children.

They have even named it a war. For the future of America they must be defeated.

How many condemn Fred Phelps?

When the Fundys bring as much to the country and to society as the gays, then, I might feel different, but I know it will never happen. They must be marginalized. They don’t even know they supported wiping out the Christian religion in Iraq. Could they be any more ignorant? Seriously?